Off topic messages (was Re: [wellylug] Earthquake)

[Jonathan Harker]

Ewen McNeill wrote:
> Advertising _always_[0] leads to more people thinking that advertising
> is okay.  Which leads to more people posting adverts.  Which leads
> to automatic postings.  And pretty soon discussion is impossible.
> Advertising "killed" Usenet; advertising is well on its way towards
> killing email.[1]  I'd rather it didn't kill the LUG discussion list.
> 
> IME the only defendable policy is "no advertising".

<snip>

> The LUG is of course welcome to move its mailing list somewhere else
> that supports advertising, of even somewhere "advertising supported".
> I'll even assist with transfering the message archives and user list.
> 
> But I won't be subscribing to such a list.
> 
> Ewen

If you can define "advertising" for us, that would be helpful. It seems you're 
mainly talking about "commercial advertising".

For instance, what if I had a second-hand Doohickery Foofoo Valve that I want 
to offer my Linux mates because I know they work in Linux as opposed to 
[insert competing Foofoo Valve here] which doesn't? I don't see that as 
commercial advertising, because I'm not acting commercially.

If on the other hand I owned a computer shop and I wanted to fob stock for 
discounts to my Linux mates, that's different, because regardless of how kind 
it might be, it's commercial advertising.

I think a discussion list that bans people trading personal bits and pieces to 
each other (as long as it is related to the discussion topic and the replies 
are explicitly directed off-list) is too restrictive.

I have been on a number of lists over the last 15 years, on all sorts of 
topics like programming, medieval reenactment, trombones, etc. and it seems 
unrealistic to ban such personal trading. It also doesn't escalate when 
members have clues and isn't open to the general public.

Feel free to disagree, or even discuss...
:-)

Cheers,
J